Conquering the world, or, How I lost seven hours in a snap.
I'll be up front and say I'm not a "Civ-Fan." I've dabbled in the series off and on and even those were largely kept to the more recent sequels. Now it wasn't that I hated the series, it just never struck my interest enough to delve in too deep. So although I rarely give into the hype I got Civilization 5 on how much excitement I kept seeing people had for it. Turns out it was worth it.
The series, as far as I can tell, carries on its traditional mechanics and style. You pick from a list of great world leaders, ranging from Washington to Gandhi, etc. Each leader having unique perks and units to employ over the course of the campaign. From then on it's building your power by settling cities, finding various resources, researching new technologies and contending with other leaders who want and equal, or greater, slice of the pie that is our planet.
Civ 5 changes up a few things since the last game though. Rather then square tiles, the foundations of your controlled areas, they are now hexagons. You'd think such a change would be meaningless but the added dimensions add a very freeing sense of movement for your units to travel. The graphics and interface have also undergone a lot tweaking. No longer does the screen feel cluttered or overwhelming. Visually the game is also very nice to look at.
The mechanics feel smooth and offer a number of challenges. Are you a leader who wants to build a military empire? Crushing any who dare oppose you? Or are you a diplomat? Making allies and working for common ground throughout the ages? The game offers multiple ways of winning, each proving to be no simple cake walk but never feeling like an uphill grind.
So here are the downsides I've found. Despite the multiple ways of achieving victory I felt the game naturally leaned too much towards a military style of play. In one of my more memorable campaigns I was forced to do battle with France and China who invaded my lands even though I sought to try and achieve victory purely through cultural means. Granted it was fun regaining conquered cities and even getting revenge on the opposing nations. It just left me feeling that triumph through passive means was near to impossible.
Also many of the elements might be a tad complex for gamers unfamiliar with deep RTS titles. This is just a minor opinion however as I'd never suggest making it shallow in an attempt to lure new comers.
I really can't speak harshly on any of the short comings though as they feel rather minor and some might be just my lack of experience and after a campaign or two I'll figure them out. What I can say is that even though I'm not a Civ-Fan this game has proven to be quite fun and engaging and I don't see myself getting bored with it anytime soon.
